阐述和挑战本科工程中的可持续发展

Robert K. Irish, L. Romkey
{"title":"阐述和挑战本科工程中的可持续发展","authors":"Robert K. Irish, L. Romkey","doi":"10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Being able to structure reasoned argument is fundamental to engaging in critical discourse, student learning, and academic preparation. This paper analyzes students’ approaches to constructing ethical arguments about sustainability. In a required Engineering & Society course, students were asked to evaluate possible approaches as ethical or unethical. This work-in-progress paper focuses on students’ conceptual understanding of course material and their rhetorical decisions in structuring argument. Through analysis of student papers and interviews, we discovered that students’ reasoning abilities were limited by a range of factors from their struggle to overcome personal bias to a limited understanding of sustainability. However, students also experimented with rhetorical strategies. We describe implications, including the need to improve our teaching both of ethical argumentation, and of the potentialities and pitfalls of sustainable development and alternatives.","PeriodicalId":286504,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)","volume":"2016 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Articulating and Challenging Sustainable Development in Undergraduate Engineering\",\"authors\":\"Robert K. Irish, L. Romkey\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Being able to structure reasoned argument is fundamental to engaging in critical discourse, student learning, and academic preparation. This paper analyzes students’ approaches to constructing ethical arguments about sustainability. In a required Engineering & Society course, students were asked to evaluate possible approaches as ethical or unethical. This work-in-progress paper focuses on students’ conceptual understanding of course material and their rhetorical decisions in structuring argument. Through analysis of student papers and interviews, we discovered that students’ reasoning abilities were limited by a range of factors from their struggle to overcome personal bias to a limited understanding of sustainability. However, students also experimented with rhetorical strategies. We describe implications, including the need to improve our teaching both of ethical argumentation, and of the potentialities and pitfalls of sustainable development and alternatives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":286504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)\",\"volume\":\"2016 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

能够组织合理的论点是参与批判性话语,学生学习和学术准备的基础。本文分析了学生构建关于可持续性的伦理论证的方法。在一门工程与社会必修课程中,学生们被要求评估可能的方法是道德的还是不道德的。这篇正在进行中的论文主要关注学生对课程材料的概念理解和他们在组织论点时的修辞决定。通过对学生论文和访谈的分析,我们发现学生的推理能力受到一系列因素的限制,从他们努力克服个人偏见到对可持续性的有限理解。然而,学生们也尝试了修辞策略。我们描述了影响,包括需要改进我们的教学伦理论证,以及可持续发展和替代方案的潜力和陷阱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Articulating and Challenging Sustainable Development in Undergraduate Engineering
Being able to structure reasoned argument is fundamental to engaging in critical discourse, student learning, and academic preparation. This paper analyzes students’ approaches to constructing ethical arguments about sustainability. In a required Engineering & Society course, students were asked to evaluate possible approaches as ethical or unethical. This work-in-progress paper focuses on students’ conceptual understanding of course material and their rhetorical decisions in structuring argument. Through analysis of student papers and interviews, we discovered that students’ reasoning abilities were limited by a range of factors from their struggle to overcome personal bias to a limited understanding of sustainability. However, students also experimented with rhetorical strategies. We describe implications, including the need to improve our teaching both of ethical argumentation, and of the potentialities and pitfalls of sustainable development and alternatives.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信